(A 


r 


UC-NRLF 


bOM    ItM 


H 
CO 

O 
Q 


BANCROFT 
LIBRARY 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

Theo  M.    Crook  CollGction 


.  ' 


^^^^<^-- U^^-yU^^-^fi-i^ 


TO  THE  'LONDON  TIMES." 


BY 


DOCTOR    RAFAEL  I  SEIJAS,    LL.D. 


(Translated  from  the  Spanish.) 


^ 


{* 


ATIlANTA,  GA.: 

Franklin  Printing  &  Publishing  Company-, 

Geo.  W.  Harrison,  Manager. 

1896. 


TO  THE  'LONDON  TIMES." 


BY 


DOCTOR  RAFAEL^SEIJAS,   LL.D. 


(Translated  from  the  Spanish.) 


Atlanta,  Ga. 

The  Franklin  Printing  and  Pdbi.isiiingCo. 

Geo.  W.  Harrison,  State  Printer,  Manager. 

1896. 


13  nv   o  fl 


C 


n t  (b  ^ 


INTRODUCTION. 

The  following  is  a  translation  of  an  article  which  appeared  in 
the  Diario  of  Caracas,  of  the  25th  November  last.  It  is  from 
the  pen  of  Doctor  Rafael  Seijas,  the  eminent  Venezuelan 
jurist  and  diplomat,  and  is  a  fair  and  dispassionate  presentation 
of  the  merits  of  the  boundary  dispute  between  that  country  and 
British  Guiana.  Although  the  paper  antedates  the  President's 
special  message  of  December  last,  and  the  subsequent  unani- 
mous acting  of  the  U.  S.  Congress  in  harmony  therewith,  it  is 
none  the  less  interesting  at  this  time,  when  the  people  of  this 
country  are  eagerly  seeking  reliable  information  touching  the 

antecedents  of  the  Venezuelan  case. 

William  L.  Scruggs. 
January,  1896. 


^  \  \  (^e> 


TO  "THE  LONDON   TIMES." 


In  the  ''London  Tiincs'  of  October  I2th  last  we  find,  under 
the  heading  of  "Enarland  and  Venezuela,"  an  editorial 
wherein  its  author  discusses  the  pending  boundary  question 
between  said  countries. 

The  high  standard  of  the  Times,  the  credit  it  enjoys,  its 
importance,  the  interests  represented  by  it,  and  the  inspira- 
tion it  receives  in  certain  cases,  oblige  us  to  regard  this  publi- 
cation as  an  important  one  and  its  editorial  utterances  as 
well  worthy  of  consideration.  \ 

We  shall,  therefore,  ignore  other  English  publications  and 
discuss  this  one  with  the  intention  of  making  clear  to  impar- 
tial minds  whatever  value  it  may  have  in  view  of  its  ante- 
cedents. 

The  publication  in  question  has  been  occasioned  by  a  com- 
munication, mentioned  as  a  very  lengthy  one,  from  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  to  the  Government  of  Great 
Britain,*  in  which  it  is  claimed  that  the  history  of  the  dispute 
is  given  and  the  principles  directing  the  policy  of  the  United 
States  in  such  cases  are  expounded.  It  is  claimed  that  such 
historv  has  been  drawn  exclusively  from  Venezuelan  sources  ; 
that  it  could  not  be  answered  without  careful  consideration  of 
the  facts  and  principles  stated  in  it,  and  that  in  accordance 
with  the  traditions  of  Lord  Salisbury's  administration,  it  will 
receive  all  due  consideration.  Telegrams  of  later  date  assert 
that  this  communication  has  been  sent  to  the  Crown  law 
officers  for  consideration.  It  may  be  reasonably  inferred  then 
that  there  is  no  truth  in  the  probably  absurd  report,  published 
by  ill-informed  newspaper  men,  stating  that  Lord  Salisbury 
heard  it  read  with  impatience,  his  irritability  going  so  far  as  to 
interrupt  the  reading  of  it. 

*  Mr,  Olney's  note  of  July  last. 


6. 

The  Times,  while  pretending  to  give  to  England  the  right 
which  is  Venezuela's  in  the  boundary  question,  ingeniously 
admits  that  the  question  has  two  sides,  viz.:  a  question  of 
right,  and  a  question  of  transaction  and  convenience.  It 
is  argued  that  as  Holland's  successor  by  right  of  conquest. 
Great  Britain  is  entitled  to  all  the  possessions  of  the  former  in 
Guiana,  and  that  the  fixation  of  the  limit  of  this  area  is  the 
point  that  has  been  in  discussion  for  a  century;  that  in  1795 
the  English  took  possession  of  it  for  a  second  time,  and  that 
under  their  supervision  its  limits  were  settled  ;  that  a  British 
Lieutenant-Governor  described,  in  1804,  the  western  limit 
somewhat  vaguely  as  "  being  in  the  Spanish  establishments  on 
the  Orinoco  ;  and  that  lately  arguments  and  documents  have 
been  collected  to  prove  the  eastern  extreme  limit  of  the  Span- 
ish establishments  and  a#  the  same  time  those  of  the  Dutch 
jurisdiction. 

We  must  observe  at  this  juncture,  that  if  the  Dutch  Colony 
of  Guiana  was  twice  in  the  hands  of  the  English  by  right  of 
conquest,  restitution  was  made  by  them  to  the  former  by  the 
Treaty  of  Amiens  in  1802,  the  third  article  of  which  says: 

"  His  British  Majesty  will  make  restitution  to  the  French 
Republic  and  its  allies,  to  wit :  H.  Catholic  Majesty  and  the 
Batavian  Republic,  of  all  the  possessions  a?id  colonies  that  belonged 
to  them  respectively  and  that  may  have  bcoi  occupied  or  conquered 
by  British  forces  during  the  zuar,  exception  being  )nade  of  the  Isla?id 
of  Trinidad  and  the  Dutch  pcssessio/is  i/i  the  Ceylon  Islands. 

As  in  this  Treaty  of  Peace  there  is  no  confirmation  in  favor 
of  the  English  of  the  conquest  of  Dutch  Guiana,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  its  restitution  to  its  former  owner  is  agreed  upon,  it 
is  evident  that  the  English  have  no  reason  to  lay  any  claims 
to  it  on  account  of  said  act  of  war,  nor  any  right  in  dating  the 
acquisition  of  that  territory  from  1795. 

It  was  by  the  Treaty  of  London  dated  on  the  14th  of  April, 
1814,  that  England  received  a  portion  of  the  Dutch  Colony  of 
Guiana,  to  wit:  "the  settlements  of  Demerara,  Essequibo  and 
Berbice,"  which,  according  to  Article  ist  of  said  treaty, 
were  excepted  from  the  stipulation  of  restitution  made  therein, 


and  the  completion  and  full  cession  of  which  to  Her  Britannic 
Majesty  was  confirmed  in  the  second  paragraph  of  the  first 
additional  article,  in  consideration  of  certain  engagements  con- 
tracted by  England  in  favor  of  the  Sovereign  Prince  of  the 
Netherlands.  This  is  the  only  title  that  Great  Britain  can  lay 
claim  to,  since  the  conquests  not  confirmed  by  the  Treaty  of 
Peace  have  no  legal  value  whatever. 

Neither  in  this  pact,  nor  in  that  of  1802,  nor  in  any  other, 
has  the  territory  possessed  by  Holland  ever  been  defined ; 
moreover,  no  one  gives  those  boundaries  which  "  TJie  Times'' 
asserts  were  defined  under  English  supervision. 

We  cannot  understand  how  the  English,  who  were  not  then 
the  owners  but  the  military  occupants,  could  have  the  power 
to  increase  the  territory,  nor  to  fix  the  boundaries  with  other 
nations,  which  under  no  circumstances  can  be  made  ex  parte 
but  only  in  accordance  with  the  rightful  adjacent  possessor  or 
by  a  lawful  award.  If  the  English  succeeded  the  Dutch,  they 
must  have  acquired  the  lattter's  own  rights  and  at  the  same 
time  remain  bound  to  all  obligations  contracted  by  them. 
Now,  the  Treaty  of  Miinster,  of  1648,  by  which  the  Dutch 
usurpations  of  Spanish  territory  in  America  were  legalized, 
prohibited  the  Dutch  from  navigating  or  trading  in  towns, 
villages,  establishments  where  there  were  markets,  fortifica- 
tions, or  castles,  or  in  any  other  possessions  of  the  other  con- 
tracting party. 

It  is  only  since  1880  that  the  English  Government  has  pre- 
tended ''by  virtue  of  old  treaties  zvitli  the  native  tribes"  and  "sub- 
sequent cessions  made  by  Holland,"  to  draw  a  boundary  line 
beginning  at  a  point  on  the  mouth  of  the  Orinoco  west  of 
Point  Barima,  following  a  southerly  course  to  the  Imataca 
Mountains,  thence  to  the  northwest  through  the  Santa  Maria 
Highlands  just  south  of  Upata  as  far  as  the  chain  on  the  east- 
ern border  of  the  Caroni,  thence  to  the  south  as  far  as  the  great 
range  of  the  Guiana  District,  and  to  the  south  again  as  far  as 
the  Pacaraima  mountains. 

But  what  was  the  date  of  those  "  treaties  "  made  with  the  na- 
tive tribes?     Which  were  the  lands  obtained  from  them?     By 


8 

what  authority  did  they  aHenate  said  lands?  We  have  been 
unable  to  find  out.  No  trace  of  them  are  discovered  in  any  of- 
ficial collection  of  Great  Britain's  treaties. 

We  were  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  before  the  first  restitution 
of  Dutch  Guiana  to  the  Netherlands  in   1783,  or  at  the  time  of 
the  second  in    1802,  or   during  its   military   occupation   by  the 
English  since   1803,  the  latter  territory  had  been  incVeased  by 
the  alleged  Indian  cessions. 

There  is,  however,  an  indisputable  point,  viz:  neither  Lord 
Aberdeen,  nor  Lord  Granville,  nor  Lord  Rosebery,  nor  any^ 
other  Secretary  of  Foreign  Affairs  of  Great  Britain  has  ever 
made  mention  of  any  other  titles  save  those  obtained  from 
Holland. 

It  is  stated  that  Sir  R.  Schomburgk,  in  1840,  defined  the 
boundary  line  known  by  his  name,  which  divides  almost  in  two 
equal  parts  the  territory  now  disputed  by  the  Governments  of 
Great  Britain  and  Venezuela ;  and  that  the  subsequent  agree- 
ment of  1850  was  a  contract  between  both  Governments  to  re- 
gard as  neutral  the  territory  of  the  disputed  area,  which,  until 
a  decision  upon  their  mutual  pretensions  was  arrived  at,  should 
not  be  usurped  by  either  of  the  two  parties. 

We  believe  ourselves  authorized  to  protest  against  this  dic- 
tatorial assertion  in  regard  to  the  dividing  in  halves  of  the  dis- 
puted territory,  and  equally  authorized  to  affirm  that  the 
Schomburgk  line  of  1840  represents  the  total  pretensions  of 
Great  Britain. 

The  commission  given  by  Her  British  Majesty  to  Sir  R.  H. 
Schomburgk  was  to  draw  the  chart  of  the  limits  between  British 
Guiana  and  Venezuela  and  to  mark  them  out.  We  have  before 
us  the  chart  attached  to  the  pamphlet  then  published  under  the 
title  of  "Sketch  of  a  Map  of  British  Guiana  by  Sir  Robert  H. 
Schomburgk.  "  Three  lines  are  shown  on  it,  one  pink,  one 
green,  and  one  yellow,  with  the  explanation  that  the  first  one 
shows  the  "boundary  as  claimed  by  Great  Britain ,  "  the  sec- 
ond one  "the  boundary  as  claimed  by  Venezuela,  ''and  the 
third  shows  the  Brazilian  pretensions. 

The  same  color  lines  are  found  in  the  German  work  pub- 
lished  in   Leipzig,  in   1841,  by   O.  A.  Schomburgk   under  the 


9 

title  of  "Travels  of  Robert  Herman  Schomburgk  during  the 
years  1835  to  1839  in  Guiana  and  the  Orinoco,  according  to 
his  Reports  and  communications  to  the  London  Geographical 
Society,  with  a  prologue  by  Alexander  Von  Humboldt,  ac- 
companied by  some  of  his  works  on  certain  important  astro- 
nomical positions  in  Guiana.  " 

In  these  charts  nothing  is  said  about  either  extreme,  me- 
dium, or  minimum  pretensions  of  Great  Britain  ;  only  one  is 
mentioned  ;  at  that  time  she  had  no  others. 

As  a  palpable  proof  of  this,  there  stand  the  instructions 
given  on  March  i8th,  1840,  by  the  celebrated  Lord  Palmer- 
ston,  who  was  not  an  ignorant  person  nor  could  he  be  called 
impartial  when  treating  of  the  interests  of  his  nation  as  judged 
by  his  own  countrymen. 

From  the  newspaper  "The  Argosy"  of  Demerara,  Vol.  30, 
number  752,  issued  October  12th,  1895,  ^^'^  transcribe  the  fol- 
lowing : 

"  At  this  moment,  when  the  Schomburgk  boundary  line  is 
being  violently  discussed,  it  will  be  of  interest  to  read  the  fol- 
lowing communication  taken  from  a  Parliamentary  paper 
dated  May  iith,  1840,  as  it  gives  the  real  object  of  the  trav- 
eler's work  :" 

"  Foreign  Office. 

"  March  i8th,  1840. 

"  Sir  : — Viscount  Palmerston  has  ordered  me  to  acknowl- 
edge receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  6th  inst.  and  the  enclosed 
copies  and  extracts  from  communications  annexed  thereto  from 
Mr.  Light,  Governor  of  British  Guiana,  relating  to  the  con- 
venience of  entering  into  such  an  agreement  with  the  Govern- 
ments of  Brazil,  Venezuela,  and  Holland  as  would  accurately 
define  the  limits  of  British  Guiana. 

"  Referring  to  that  part  of  your  letter  in  which  it  is  stated 
that  Lord  John  Russell  deems  it  important  that  the  limits  of 
British  Guiana  be  investigated  and  agreed  upon,  if  possible, 
and  that  Mr.  Schomburgk's  investigations  in  those  parts  have 
made  him  particularlv  apt  to  be  useful  in  case  the  services  of 
a  person  familiar  with  the  geography  of  British  Guiana  be  re- 


10 

quired  to  fix  the  limits  of  the  British  territory,  I  must  sav  that 
the  proceeding  that  Lord  Pahnerston  would  suggest  for  the 
consideration  of  Sir  John  Russell  would  be  that  a  map  be 
drawn  of  British  Guiana  in  accordance  with  the  limits  de- 
scribed by  Mr.  Schomburgk  ;  that  a  report  be  sent  containing 
a  minute  description  of  the  natural  characteristics,  defining 
and  constituting  the  questioned  limits,  and  that  similar  copies 
of  said  map  and  reports  be  submitted  to  the  Government  of 
Venezuela,  Brazil,  and  Holland  as  an  exposition  of  British  pre- 
tensions. That  in  the  meantime  an  English  commissioner  be 
sent  to  mark  the  boundaries  in  the  territory,  in  order  to  desig- 
nate by  permanent  posts  the  boundary  line  thus  claimed  by 
Great  Britain.  Then  it  would  devolve  upon  each  of  these 
Governments  to  present  any  objection  they  may  make  against 
these  limits,  with  an  exposition  of  the  basis  of  their  claims,  and 
then  Her  Majesty's  Government  w6uld  give  the  answers 
deemed  just  and  proper.  " 

Although  the  course  recommended  was  a  most  extraor- 
dinary one,  yet  it  was,  in  part,  followed  in  1841,  and  it  was 
due  to  the  well  founded  complaints  of  Dr.  Fortique,  Minister 
of  Venezuela  in  London,  that  Lord  Aberdeen  ordered  the  re- 
moval of  such  marks,  which,  according  to  his  explanation,  did 
not  constitute  a  true  boundary,  but  only  a  pretension  of  what 
Great  Britain  claimed  to  be  the  limit. 

If  the  first  part  of  the  plan  was  complied  with,  let  us  state 
at  this  juncture,  that  this  cannot  be  said  of  the  second  part. 
We  have  examined  all  the  matter  that  has  been  printed  in  this 
connection,  and  we  have  failed  to  find  the  suggested  report  of 
the  exposition  of  Great  Britain's  titles.  We  have  found,  how- 
ever, repeated  proofs  to  show  that  this  was  concealed  from 
Venezuela,  to  which  country  only  vague  assertions,  devoid  of 
particulars  whatsoever,  have  been  made  and  reiterated  in  writing. 

But  to  return  to  our  theme,  namely  ;  that  until  recent  date 
there  has  been  but  one  pretension  of  Great  Britain,  we  will  add 
that  strong  proof  that  such  was  the  case  lies  in  the  fact  of  the 
negotiations  conducted  by  Senor  Fortique  and  Lord  Aber- 
deen.     It  is  a  fact  that  to  the  propositions  made  bv  Venezuela 


11 

for  the  demarcation  of  limits  by  the  Essequibo,  Lord  Aber- 
deen answered  on  the  20th  of  March,  1844,  by  making  an- 
other proposition  for  a  line  starting  at  the  coast,  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Moroco,  and  ended  by  stating  that  such  a  transaction 
would  entail  the  abandonment  or  cession  in  favor  of  the  Re- 
public of  tJic  territory  comprised  bettveen  the  moiitJi  of  the  Moroco 
and  the  mouth  of  the  Amacuro  and  the  range  of  mountains  where  it 
has  its  source. 

Had  England  deemed  her  rights  more  extensive,  surely- 
then  would  have  been  the  proper  moment  to  make  it  known  in 
its  full  extent,  in  order  to  enhance  the  merits  of  her  "  cession." 
But  as  she  limited  herself  to  what  has  been  said,  it  is  but 
natural  to  infer  that  she  had  no  further  pretensions;  and  that 
a  statesman  of  Lord  Aberdeen's  astuteness  could  not  have  for- 
gotten in  this  matter  the  interests  of  his  nation. 

A  similar  charge  should  be  made  against  Lord  Granville, 
who,  upon  his  refusal  to  accept  the  frontier  line  as  proposed 
by  Dr.  Jose  Maria  Rojas  in  1881,  and  proposal  to  substitute 
for  it  another  starting  from  a  point  twent3'-nine  miles  from  the 
mouth  of  the  Barima  to  the  east,  was  silent  upon  the  further 
increase  of  British  territory. 

Lord  Rosebery  would  have  made  the  same  error,  when,  in 
his  first  administration  in  1866,  he  proposed  to  General  Guz- 
man Blanco  to  divide  in  two  equal  parts  the  lines  drawn  by 
Dr.  Rojas  and  Lord  Granville,  but  to  leave  the  mouth  of  the 
Guaima  river  in  English  territory,  as  he  attached  great  impor- 
tance to  the  possession  of  this  point,  the  cession  of  which  by 
Venezuela  to  be  compensated  to  by  cession  of  territory  in  an- 
other part  of  Guayana. 

It  was  in  1890,  when,  for  the  first  time,  Venezuela  was  in- 
formed that  Great  Britain  had  three  lines,  viz.:  the  Schomburgk 
line,  which  was  then  declared  as  not  subject  to  discussion;  an- 
other line  including  the  mining  district  of  Yuruary,  which 
might  be  submitted  to  arbitration;  and,  lastly,  a  third  line 
called  "extreme  limit,"  which  Great  Britain  was  ready  to 
abandon,  moved  by  friendly  considerations,  etc. 

It  is  pertinent  here  to  call  to  mind  the  fact  that  the  Schom- 


12 

burgk  line,  adopted  as  the  definite  boundary  since  1886,  is  not 
the  same  as  that  shown  in  Schomburgk's  former  maps,  but  an- 
other which  takes  in  considerably  more  of  the  Venezuelan 
territory,  as  remarked  by  Senor  Marco  Antonio  Saluzzo,  Min- 
ister of  Foreign  Relations,  in  the  preliminary  exposition  to 
the  "  Libro  Amarillo  "  {Yellow  Book)  submitted  to  Congress  in 
1 89 1,  when  the  old  frontier  line  and  the  new  one  attributed  to 
Schomburgk  were  contrasted. 

It  seems  very  strange  to  us  that  an  engineer,  after  having 
spent  five  years  in  exploring  that  territory,  should  have  only 
such  uncertain  results  that  a  total  change  should  be  necessary 
in  the  contents  of  his  pamphlet  in  order  to  give  the  advantage 
to  the  Government  which  employed  him. 

Instead  of  those  numberless  proofs  which  Her  Britannic 
Majesty's  Government  claims  to  have  of  their  rights,  there 
has  been,  up  to  the  present  time,  only  an  advertisement  pub- 
lished in  the  "  London  Gazette''  of  October  22d,  1886,  wherein 
it  is  proclaimed  that : 

"  Whereas,  The  limits  of  British  Guiana,  Her  Majesty's 
Colony,  are  in  dispute  between  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment and  the  Government  of  Venezuela;  and,  whereas,  Her 
British  Majesty's  Government  has  been  informed  that  the 
Venezuelan  Government  has  granted,  or  is  about  to  grant,  cer- 
tain concessions  of  lands,  within  the  territory  claimed  by  Her 
Majesty's  Governments,  such  titles  will  not  be  recognized  nor 
admitted,  and  any  person  taking  possession  of  said  land,  or 
pretending  under  said  titles  to  perform  any  rights,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  trespass  according  to  the  laws  of  the  Colony." 
It  is  added  that  in  the  Library  of  the  Colonial  Office,  in  Down- 
ing street,  or  in  the  Office  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Government 
of  Georgetown,  Demerara,  British  Guiana,  "there  may  be  seen 
a  copy  of  a  map  showing  the  limits  between  British  Guiana 
and  Venezuela  as  claimed  by  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment. 

In  1890  it  was  declared  to  Dr.  Modesto  Urbaneja,  agent  for 
Venezuela,  that  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Government  could  not 
admit  as  satisfactory  any  arrangement   wherein   the   territory 


13 

lying  within  the  line  drawn  by  Sir  R.  Schomburgk  was  not 
admitted  as  English  possessions;  and  to  Dr.  Lucio  Pulido,  who 
succeeded  Dr.  Urbaneja,  it  was  said  that:  "  Her  British  Maj- 
esty's Government  could  not  allow  its  rights  to  the  territory 
lying  within  the  line  explored  by  Schomburgk  to  be  disputed." 

Later  on  a  line  was  indicated  to  Dr.  Lucio  Pulido,  "  starting 
from  Point  Mocomoco  and  the  river  Guaima,  and  touching  at 
the  west  the  Amacuro  river;  that  the  frontier  line  (thus  proposed 
in  exchange  or  compensation)  should  follow  the  course  of  the 
Uruan  (Yuran)  river,  from  its  junction  with  the  Cuyuni,  and 
could  be  extended  to  the  Usupamo  range  and  to  the  Riconoto 
range  of  mountains." 

At  the  last  moment.  Dr.  Lucio  Pulido  was  informed  by  ofifi- 
cial  communication  that:  "  Her  Britannic  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment, desirous  to  negotiate  directly  with  the  Venezuelan  Gov- 
ernment for  the  establishment  of  a  frontier  reciprocally 
advantageous  and  approaching  as  near  as  possible  the  natural 
boundaries,  would  extend  to  the  southeast  the  line  proposed 
by  Sir  Thomas  Sanderson,  starting  at  the  Mocomoco  cape,  and 
that  they  would  desist  from  all  pretensions  to  any  compensa- 
tion on  account  of  the  restitution  of  the  mouths  of  the  Orinoco 
and  adjacent  territories." 

In  the  last  negotiation  entrusted  to  Senor  Tomas  Michelena, 
Lord  Rosebery  modified  the  proposition  for  arbitration  made 
by  the  Venezuelan  agent,  pretending  that  he  should  agree  to 
the  following:  "  That  the  disputed  territory  lies  west  of  the 
line  marked  in  the  map  sent  to  the  Government  of  Venezuela 
on  the  1st  of  March,  i  890,  and  east  of  a  line  to  be  drawn  on 
the  said  map,  starting  from  the  rise  of  the  river  Cumano,  then 
following  its  course  and  the  upward  course  of  the  river  Arina 
along  the  Usupamo  range." 

The  acceptance  of  this  proposition  would  have  been  to 
legitimize  the  ever-inc  reasing  usurpations  of  the  British,  and 
to  leave  open  to  discussion  the  possession  of  a  territory 
never  before  disputed  to  Venezuela.  Senor  Michelena  very 
naturally  refused  most  energetically  and  with  weighty  rea- 
sons to    accept    such    unheard    of  pretensions,  and,    notwith- 


14 

standing  his  review  of  the  antecedents  of  the  question,  among 
others  the  last  promises  made  to  Dr.  Pulido,  he  could  not  move 
Lord  Roseberv  from  the  attitude  he  had  taken,  and  the  only 
reply  obtained  from  him  was  that  Senor  Michelena's  argu- 
ments "left  no  opening  for  an}"  acceptable  agreement." 

Such  is  Great  Britain's  attitude  at  the  present  moment. 

Venezuela  could  never  have  consented  to  recognize  Eng- 
land's ownership  of  the  disputed  territory,  because  such  a 
course  would  imply  the  renunciation  of  its  sovereigntv  and  its 
independence,  thus  remaining  under  the  rule  of  another 
nation,  its  equal  in  law. 

Between  private  individuals,  one  of  the  contending  parties 
cannot  end  a  litigation  by  simply  awarding  to  himself  the 
rights  concerned,  but  must  go  to  the  Courts  of  Law  in  de- 
mand of  a  verdict  which  he  is  bound  to  respect  and  abide  by. 

Nations,  however,  have  no  common  superior  ;  hence  the 
necessit}-  of  ending  their  controversies  between  themselves  by 
mutual  consent,  either  emanating  from  direct  negotiations  or 
from  the  verdict  of  an  arbitrator  which  they  agree  to  accept 
as  an  obligation  contracted  by  a  formal  preliminary  agree- 
ment. If  between  individuals  no  power  to  dictate  is  permis- 
sible, much  less  will  this  apply  to  nations. 

For  this  reason  Venezuela  places  no  value  whatever,  either 
upon  the  original  "  Schomburgk  line,"  nor  on  the  second  line 
of  that  name,  which  was  unknown  to  her  until  1890.  Far 
from  accepting  either,  she  protested  against  the  first  from  the 
day  in  which  she  became  aware  of  its  existence,  and  obtained 
from  Great  Britain  the  order  for  the  removal  of  the  posts 
erected  to  mark  said  line.  Venezuela  has  protested  against 
the  acts  oppressive  to  her  rights  performed  by  the  English 
Government  and  by  the  Colonv  of  Demerara,  and  has  also 
taken  other  steps  conducive  to  the  preservation  of  said  rights. 

Can  this  be  the  offense  that  has  exhausted  the  patience  of 
Great  Britain? 

Since  when  has  the  fulfillment  of  the  most  sacred  duties, 
the  defense  of  one's   own  territorv.  been   considered   a  crime? 

We  are   accused  of  ingratitude  when  we   are  reminded  that 


15 

Mr.  Canning  aided  in  the  creation  of  these  nationalities  in 
order  to  re-establish  the  European  balance  of  power! 

We  acknowledge  that  Great  Britain  then  served  the  cause 
of  justice  by  refusing  to  enter  into  the  plans  of  the  "  Holy 
Alliance"  against  the  spirit  of  innovation  of  the  century;  and 
by  opposing  the  projects  of  Spain  to  reconquer  her  colonies  in 
America;  this  being  done  by  concurrence  with  the  United 
States  which  had  already  proclaimed  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  and 
by  entering,  as  did  the  United  States  six  months  previous,  into 
a  Treaty  of  Friendship,  Commerce  and  Navigation  with  the 
Republic  of  Colombia. 

This  treaty  gave  English  commerce  unconditionally  the  priv- 
ileges of  "the  most  favored  nation  "  ;  the  equality  of  the  flag 
was  stipulated.  Englishmen  enjoyed  the  same  privileges  as  the 
Colombians  as  regards  succession  to  goods  and  chattels  of  all 
kinds  and  denominations,  either  by  sale,  donation,  exchange  or 
by  bequest  or  otherwise,  according  to  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice. Several  franchises,  or  exemptions,  were  granted  to 
them  ;  and  English  and  Colombian  vessels  were  given  equal 
privileges,  the  latter  being  required  to  be  built  in  Colombia, 
which  country  was  still  in  its  infancy.  Besides,  England's  con- 
currence was  promised  to  aid  in  the  abolition  of  the  slave  trade 
which  the  Supreme  ' '  Junta  "  of  Venezuela  had  voluntarily  sup- 
pressed since  1810.  So  hastily  was  this  treaty  concluded  that 
the  clause  referring  to  its  duration  was  omitted  as  well  as  other 
stipulations  that  have  not  yet  been  added  to  it,  and  it  still  sub- 
sists without  any  change  after  seventy  years,  which,  according 
to  Lord  Granville,  has  made  it  obsolete.  When  Venezuela  re- 
newed this  treaty  in  1834  it  was  left  just  as  it  stood. 

Since  then  Venezuela  has  accepted  other  pacts  or  agreements 
proposed  by  Great  Britain  in  regard  to  postal  conventions,  ex- 
tradition of  fugitive  criminals  from  the  English  West  Indies, 
pecuniary  claims,  and,  above  all,  the  treaty  of  1839  ^"  regard 
to  the  abolition  of  the  slave  trade.  By  this  treaty,  the  Repub- 
lic agreed  to  maintain  in  force  the  Colombian  law  of  1825  de- 
claring this  trade  an  act  of  piracy  punishable  by  death.  In  ad- 
dition to  all  this,  Venezuela,  confiding  in  an  illusory  reciprocity, 
granted  to  England   the   right  to    visit   in    times  of  peace   her 


16 

merchant  vessels,  a  concession  she  has  solicted  in  vain  from 
other  nations,  notably  from  France  and  the  United  States.  No 
limit  was  fixed  to  this  agreement. 

Venezuela  has  duly  appreciated  the  personal  co-operation 
given,  during  her  war  of  independence,  by  brave  Britons  who 
generously  shed  their  blood  for  their  love  of  liberty,  and 
O'Leary,  MacGregor,  D'Evereux,  Minchin,  Chitty,  Wilson, 
Fergusson  and  many  others,  are  the  names  of  those  who  rest 
among  our  heroes  in  our  National  Pantheon. 

Colombia  carried  its  magnanimity  to  the  extent  of  admitting, 
without  the  careful  and  proper  investigation  made  indispensa- 
ble by  the  repeated  and  enormous  abuses  made  under  the  then 
prevailing  circumstances,  the  claims  for  money,  arms,  ammu- 
nition, equipments  and  other  supplies  obtained  in  England  for 
the  needs  in  the  struggle  against  Spain.  Venezuela  is  even 
now  paying,  with  the  utmost  promptness,  what  remains  of  that 
debt,  which  has  been  increased  by  subsequent  loans,  and  the 
present  Government  is  so  careful  upon  this  subject  that  not 
only  the  current  dividends  are  paid  up  but  at  the  same  time 
arrears  caused  by  the  Revolution  of  1892  are  being  settled  by 
the  payment  of  large  sums  of  money. 

English  capital  has  been  very  profitably  invested  in  the 
Caracas  and  La  Guayra  Railway  and  other  railroads,  also  in 
works  of  improvements  at  La  Guayra  and  in  mines  situated  in 
Venezuelan  territory. 

The  above  mentioned  facts  ought  to  be  more  than  sufficient 
to  inspire  Great  Britain  with  a  desire  for  the  peace  and  progress 
of  Venezuela,  even  putting  aside  the  commercial  relations  be- 
tween the  two  countries,  which  give  employment  to  several 
lines  of  British  steamers. 

The  Republic  of  Venezuela  has  given  numerous  proofs  of  its 
desire  to  maintain  friendly  relations  with  Great  Britain,  but  it 
is  the  latter  who  opposes  this  end. 

England  advanced  surreptitiously  upon  Venezuelan  territorv, 
but  since  1884  she  has  carried  on  her  plans  openly.  Since  then 
she  has  entered  into  forbidden  places;  has  appointed  commis- 
saries; raised  the  English  flag  upon  buildings;  has  taken  prisoner, 


17 

brought  to  trial  and  punished  a  Venezuelan  official;  has  sent 
to  that  territory  armed  police  to  proclaim  British  Sovereignty 
by  posters  affixed  to  the  trees;  has  issued  decrees  prohibiting 
commerce  and  the  patrolling  by  the  Revenue  Cutters  of  the 
territorv  between  Barima  and  the  Amacuro;  has  included  these 
places  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Government  of  Demerara; 
has  authorized  the  developement  of  mines  comprised  within 
the  territorv  of  the  Republic,  and  has  continued  performing  in 
the  territories  thus  invaded  other  acts  of  jurisdiction. 

Notwithstanding  this, the  British  Legation  in  Caracas  declared 
in  1850  to  the  Venezuelan  Government  that  Her  Britannic 
Majesty  had  no  "intention either  to  occupy  or  to  encroach  upon 
the  disputed  territory";  and  then  asked  and  obtained  from  the 
Venezuelan  Executive  a  similar  surety,  thus  entering  into  an 
agreement  effected  by  diplomatic  notes. 

Great  Britain,  even  after  her  advances  upon  the  territory 
since  1884,  which  de  facto  made  the  agreement  void,  has  never- 
theless deemed  this  agreement  as  in  force.  It  was  not  until 
1893,  when,  for  the  first  time,  information  was  conveyed 
through  Senor  Michelena  that  the  situation  existing  by  virtue 
of  this  agreement  could  not  be  restored,  as  Venezuela  had 
violated  its  provisions. 

If  this  violation  took  place  before  Great  Britain  had  re- 
leased herself  from  her  obligations  she  should  have  complained 
of  said  violation  and  demanded  the  fulfillment  of  the  agree- 
ment or  else  denied  it  in  case  her  claim  was  not  heeded. 

Be  it  as  it  may,  either  such  agreement  is  yet  binding,  and 
then  Great  Britain  by  her  conduct  has  violated  it,  or  it  has 
become  void,  and  in  that  case  Venezuela  is  not  debarred  from 
occupying  what  she  considers  her  own  territorv. 

Venezuela  has  consistently  and  persistently  protested  against 
these  encroachments,  and  demanded  the  evacuation  of  the 
disputed  lands  ;  but  Great  Britain,  instead  of  evacuating  them, 
has  claimed  them  as  her  indisputable  property,  not  subject  to 
arbitration,  and  advanced  unheard  of  pretensions  to  other  por- 
tions of  Venezuelan  territory,  which  last,  however,  she  graciously 
agrees  to  submit  to  arbitration. 


18 

We  are  now  told  that  the  historical  British  rights  have  been 
strengthened  by  the  recent  possession  of  the  territory.  We 
well  know  the  value  the  English  give  to  this,  their  old  saying 
that  ''possession  is  nine  points  of  tlic  Imi',"  having  become  a 
proverb. 

But  justice  cannot  admit  that  the  mere  fact  of  holding  a 
thing  is  equivalent  to  the  ownership  of  it.  If  there  be  no 
owner,  such  proceedings  may  obtain  the  force  of  proprietor- 
ship, but  not,  however,  if  there  be  an  owner,  or  if  the  owner- 
ship be  in  dispute,  which  is  an  equivalent  case. 

Let  us  pass,  then,  the  argument  of  ownership  by  right  of 
occupancy. 

In  regard  to  a  cession,  let  us  state  that  such  an  act  implies 
the  performance  of  an  agreement  to  such  an  end,  and  no  such 
agreement  exists  between  Venezuela  and  Great  Britain.  Nor 
is  there  room  for  the  argument  of  right  of  conquest,  as  this  pre- 
supposes a  war  which  has  not  taken  place,  much  less  confirma- 
tion of  such  rights  by  a  final  treaty  of  peace. 

Such  possession  could  not  be  admissible  even  as  obtained 
by  prescription,  since,  according  to  certain  opinions,  it  is  not 
recognized  bv  the  Laws  of  Nations,  and  according  to  others 
it  onlv  applies  to  immemorial  prescriptions.  In  the  present 
case,  such  prescription  is  alleged  to  have  begun  in  1884,  that 
is,  eleven  years  ago. 

At  all  events,  the  possession  preceding  the  prescription  must 
be  a  legitimate  one  resulting  from  deeds  that  could  be  trans- 
ferred. 

Force,  clandestine  acts,  and  uncertainty  make  it  void. 

This  British  possession  by  prescription  falls  under  the  head 
of  force  ;  and  to  quote  the  writers:  "One  century  of  unlawful 
possession  is  not  sufificient  to  obliterate  the  defects  such  j)osses- 
sion  may  have  had  in  its  beginning." 

It  is  well  known  that  even  in  the  case  of  legitimate  posses- 
sion, any  claims  of  a  former  owner  against  it,  are  a  hindrance 
to  such  possession,  thus  destroying  the  presumption  of  abandon- 
ment, which  certain  writers  endeavor  to  show  is  involved  in  it 
and  justifies  it.      Venezuela  has  never  abandoned  her  territory  ; 


19 

nor  has  she  been  neghgent  in  this  matter.  Her  direct  claims 
since  1841,  made  to  the  British  Government,  and  to  the  Gov- 
ernor of  Demerara,  her  persistency,  her  continued  protests, 
have  echoed  all  over  the  world. 

The  essential  requisite  of  prescription  is  its  peaceful  charac- 
ter ;  possession  based  on  violence  is  not  admitted,  no  matter 
how  old  it  may  be,  as  the  farther  back  it  dates,  the  deeper  the 
wound  inflicted  upon  the  law.  There  are  those  who  think  that 
this  right  of  might  changes  the  condition  of  affairs  ;  that  it  war- 
rants the  prescription,  but  only  in  case  that  after  cessation  of 
compulsion  the  dispossessed  owner,  being  at  liberty  to  claim 
his  rights,  fails  to  claim  them  and  remains  passive. 

This  has  not  been,  nor  is  it  now,  Venezuela's  case. 

Violence  prevails  and  threatens  to  continue  and  extend  itself 
more  and  more.  "The  Times"  states  that  the  terms  which 
Lord  Aberdeen  might  have  accepted  in  1848  would  have  been 
impossible  in  1850;  that  the  agreement  of  1850  was  insufficient 
in  1880;  that  in  1886  the  necessity  for  proclainung  the  absolute 
right  of  Great  Bfitain  to  all  the  territory  iiicbided  zuithin  the 
"  ^chomburgk  line''  became  evident;  that  they  still  claim  as  the 
heirs  of  Holland  the  extreme  limit  of  the  flow  of  all  the  rivers 
entering  into  the  Essequibo ;  but  that  there  is  a  disposition  to 
submit  to  arbitration  the  frontier  between  this  limit  and  the 
"  Schomburgk  line  ";  that  no  question  derogatory  to  British 
jurisdiction  could  be  admitted,  but  that  in  a  few  years  no  arbi- 
tration can  be  admitted  upon  any  part  of  her  rightful  boundary 
line  ! 

According  to  this,  if  since  1892  no  check  had  been  given  to 
British  intrusion,  the  Colony  of  Demerara  might  extend  as  far 
as  the  south  of  the  town  of  Upata  and  the  range  of  mountains 
on  the  east  side  of  the  Caroni,  her  extreme  limit,  according  to 
old  treaties  with  native  tribes  and  subsequent  cessions  made  by 
Holland,  although  in  1890  they  graciously  receded  from  this 
extreme  claim  in  favor  of  Venezuela,  and  arbitration  was  adopted 
for  an  increase  made  in  the  already  altered  Schomburgk  line. 

This  would  be  a  very  convenient  means  of  settling  boun- 
dary questions  :  By  ordering  the  arbitrary  erection  of  posts 
to  mark  the  boundaries  and  to  serve  as  a    means   of  opening  a 


20 

controvers}'  on  rights  with  the  contiguous  owner ;  then  closing 
the  discussion  without  listening  to  the  other  party's  argu- 
ments ;  and  later  on  to  state  that  such  boundaries  are  definite 
and  cannot  be  removed.  This  same  proceeding  might  be  ap- 
plied to  the  new  line  open  to  arbitration  and  finally  to  the  ex- 
treme pretension  which  was  only  claimed,  to  be  abandoned 
later  on.     The  threats  of  "The  Times"  seem   to  point  to  this. 

In  reference  to  the  Monroe  Doctrine  "The  Times"  says 
of  it  that  its  most  ardent  admirers  had  not  believed  that  it 
could  be  applied  to  the  establishments  already  in  existence 
when  it  was  proclaimed  ;  that  Great  Britain  has  no  pretensions 
to  a  new  territory  but  only  to  what  Holland  possessed,  from 
whom  she  took  them  by  conquest,  and  that  this  is  the  point  to 
be  determined  ;  tJiat  if  it  zvcrc  not  conchisivcly  sJioiv/i  that  these 
limits  are  not  as  extensive  as  have  been  elainied  by  successive  Eng- 
lish Governments,  then  there  might  be  grounds  for  a  contro- 
versy taking  said  Doctrine  for  a  basis,  and  to  find  out  its  true 
value,  as  it  lacks  the  sanction  of  international  recognition, 
though  it  be  popular  on  the  American  Continent. 

This  hypothesis  just  suits  the  circumstances  of  the  discus- 
sion. Venezuela  maintains  that  Holland  did  not  possess  all 
that  territory  that  England  claims  as  its  successor.  This  as- 
sertion is  based  upon  countless  proofs.  England  has  advanced 
her  stations  along  the  borders  of  the  Orinoco  as  far  as  the 
Amacuro.  Here  we  hav^e  an  argument  contrary  to  Great 
Britain's  pretensions.  General  P.  W.  Netscher,  a  Dutchman, 
in  his  history  of  the  Colonies  of  Essecjuibo,  Demerara  and  Ber- 
bice,  jjublished  in  1888,  after  having  made  an  inspection  of 
the  official  archives  of  his  country,  emphatically  affirms  that 
the  Netherlands  did  not  extend  to  the  Amacuro,  not  even  to 
the  Barima,  and  that  the  pretensions  of  the  English  heirs  ujjon 
this  point  are  not  founded. 

Other  authorities  also  agree  that  in  18 14,  when  the  cession 
of  the  Colonies  was  made  to  England,  the  Dutch  had  no  pos- 
sessions west  of  the  Essecjuibo. 

We  shall  only  add  in  regard  to  "the  Yuruan  incident,"  that 
Venezuela  does  not  consider  as   British   ]:)Ossessions  the  terri- 


21 

tory  occupied  by  an  English  station  on  the  right  margin  of 
the  Cuyuni  opposite  the  Yuruan  debouchure,  even  if  it  be  in- 
cluded within  the  so-called  second  "  Schomburgk  line."  If 
the  Republic  protested  so  loudly  against  the  first  line  of  that 
name,  and  obtained  from  Lord  Aberdeen,  in  1842,  the  remov- 
al of  the  posts,  how  could  she  accept  the  second  line  extended 
in  a  manner  as  capricious  and  unjustifiable  as  the  first? 

In  this  grave  conflict,  Venezuela  has  appealed  to  her  sisters 
on  this  continent,  and  particularly  to  the  United  States  of 
America.  On  all  sides  she  has  had  the  sympathy  of  friendly 
Governments,  and  public  opinion  has  made  known  through  the 
proper  channels  its  friendly  feeling  for  her.  The  joint  resolu- 
tion passed  by  the  American  Congress  as  suggested  by  its 
President,  and  the  American  press,  which  for  the  last  few 
months  has  been  unanimous  in  favor  of  the  peaceful  and  hon- 
orable solution  of  this  controversy,  all  give  manifest  proof  that 
the  merits  of  Venezuela's  cause  are  such  that  she  has  the  sym- 
pathies of  all,  which  fact,  the  English  both  in  the  mother 
country  and  in  the  Colony  of  Demerara  cannot  but  recognize. 

Great  Britain  as  a  first-class  power,  with  certain  interests  in 
Venezuela,  would  have  a  more  exalted  position  should  she, 
obedient  to  the  voice  of  Justice,  retrace  her  steps  taken  since 
1884,  and  place  the  matter  upon  the  same  basis  of  the  discus- 
sion initiated  in  1 84 1  by  Lord  Aberdeen;  continued  by  Lord 
Granville  in  1881,  1884,  and  1885,  and  with  Lord  Rosebery, 
during  his  first  administration  in  1886.  By  this  means  the 
friendly  relations  between  the  two  nations  would  be  renewed, 
and  with  them  the  profitable  intercourse  dependent  upon  them, 
and  the  disputed  territory  in  its  entirety  would  be  submitted  to 
arbitration  as  it  should  be  without  excluding  that  portion  which 
Great  Britain  has  declared  to  be  her  own  and  the  possession  of 

which  she  enjoys  since  1888. 

Rafael  Seijas. 


